Commission study finds no harm from GM food

There is no evidence that genetically modified foods have harmful effects on public health, according to an authoritative study by the European Commission’s scientific advisory body. The findings will be seized upon by those seeking to end the decade-long deadlock over EU approvals of GM products.

According to a draft seen by European Voice, the Joint Research Centre (JRC) has concluded that “no demonstration of any health effects of GM food products submitted to the regulatory process has been reported so far”. The findings, to be published on 10 September, are in line with conclusions reached by the World Health Organization and assessments by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) of the dozens of applications for approval of GM organisms.

The JRC report is important because it was commissioned by MEPs, many of whom have fiercely opposed a relaxation of the rules on GMs. It was requested in November 2006 by a resolution of the Parliament. It is the result of an extensive review of the existing evidence on the short- and long-term effects of GM foods. In particular, the work included a November 2007 meeting of 22 experts involved in assessment and evaluation of genetically modified organisms for the JRC and the European Food Safety Authority.

The JRC is a department of the European Commission, but, as the report itself says, its opinions are not binding on the European Commission.

There is sufficient evidence for scientists to draw conclusions about the safety of GM products, says the JRC, while acknowledging that “little is known about the potential long-term health effects of any food”, and that there is no such thing as “zero risk”. From its assessment of the evidence on allergies, it concluded that skin reactions have not been observed from GM crops on the European market. It also discussed gene transfer risks, ie, the possibility that genes from GM foods could transfer to cells or bacteria in the human body, which may be significant if antibiotic resistance genes are transferred. On this issue, it concluded that there was a greater risk of picking up genes from bacteria in the environment than from GM foods.

The experts predicted that the range of genetically modified organisms will become wider, confronting regulators with medicines and vaccines produced from GM organisms. Regulators will need to make “even more sizeable efforts to maintain adequate capacity to deal with novel products”, they concluded.

Despite numerous applications for authorisation, maize is currently the only genetically modified crop cultivated commercially in the EU. But many of the foods on Europe’s supermarket shelves already contain genetically modified micro-organisms. José Manuel Barroso, the Commission president, wants to improve political support for the EU’s approval process for GM crops, in the wake of the long-running dispute over their safety.

But health is not the only area of concern about GM crops: the potential impact on the environment is also controversial. The Commission has asked EFSA to update its guidance on genetically modified foods and to assess the long-term impact of growing GM crops, especially on so-called non-target organisms, such as insects that are in contact with GM crops.

According to Umberto Guidoni, an Italian Leftist (GUE-NGL) MEP, who led calls for the JRC study, “we really need basic scientific evidence to make the correct political decisions”. Describing himself as neither for nor against GM crops, he said: “The precautionary principle should stand. To me that means we have still to justify the need to change our agriculture. I don’t think there is really any need [to grow GM crops in Europe] either for economic reasons or for any other reasons.”